This is not fair.

[V'larr]

No one is saying flying with a rebuy will fix it. It will save you from losing the ship completely and being set back hundreds of millions due to player actions. I'd say 20-30 million is easier to obtain than 600 million.
You don't have to be so antagonistic when people are just trying to give you options to avoid huge setbacks. Nothing will ever stop people from being trolls. :\
At least with the current implementation, you can avoid being trolled entirely. I do wish that whichever ship was traveling faster would get the blame for the death though. I mean, they usually violate the speed limit to get you killed, so why are you the only one to blame?

It helps when the people giving options and advice aren't being condescending trolls themselves.

The game existed before that issue was fixed?

Okay, reading comprehension get....

The game as it existed, prior to the 17 Draconis exploit being fixed, had a set of rules that made that exploit allowable.

They fixed the exploit by adjusting those rules so that it's no longer allowed.

Savvy?

The current rules of the game don't allow combat logging, the game allows it despite the rules. FDev themselves ban people for combat logging.

The Terms and Conditions of the game don't allow intentional griefing either, which suicide-winder-ramming clearly is. Yet the practical rules of the game clearly are 'allowing' it to happen, which has been your argument up til now. The same logic must apply to combat logging.

It's one way or the other, you can't claim one is an exploit and the other isn't.

Exactly this. Once a player is aware of how the system works, why not just obey the speed limit and gank the ganker? People speeding into crowded stations are their own worst enemy.
On the other hand, anyone who​ fly's a Corvette without a rebuy deserves what they get.

Oh, great, the ideal thing is for players to all be "policing" each-other by means of suicide-ramming in front of stations. Such emergent, much gameplay, so wow. Oh and screw anybody flying anything that isn't a classy small ship. *headdesk*

 

[Spacecat]

Hmmm - maybe station applies a 99 speed limit to all ships within it's area of influence except those in silent running, and ignores their damage or destruction no matter the cause?

Or takes into account the speed of both ships in assigning blame, not just the surviving ship.

 

[Phazon Xenomorph]

I love to gank people who are breaking the speed limit by suicidewindering into them. If you don't break the speeding laws at stations you have nothing to fear. Your own hud and the station both tell you to stop speeding. If you didn't break the speed limit the only thing that would happen is that other commander would be on the rebuy screen.

 

[Devari]

Exactly this. Once a player is aware of how the system works, why not just obey the speed limit and gank the ganker? People speeding into crowded stations are their own worst enemy.

Have you actually tried sticking to the 100 m/s speed limit every single time when docking/undocking at stations?

It's like trying to actually stick to the ridiculously low posted speed limits in parking lots that are around 10 km/h in some cases. No one does it in practice because it will take you several minutes to get out of the lot and everyone else is driving a reasonable speed that is still well over the posted limit but still completely safe for parking your car.

If FD would simply increase the station speeding limit to 200-250 m/s that would still be slow enough to reduce the impact of collisions but fast enough that players could stick to it without needlessly slowing down the entire docking/undocking process. Even the docking computer will routinely use boost to reach speeds well above 100 m/s as your ship approaches the station during auto-dock so it's clear that FD has programmed docking behavior that routinely disregards these limits to make the docking process faster and more efficient.

 

[V'larr]

Do I need to repeat again for the thirtieth time in this thread why the speed limit was introduced in the first place? Tell me V'larr, how would you solve this issue?

No, you don't, I've had more than enough of your "arguing in circles" shenanigans for one day, repeating yourself doesn't change anything when you're simply ignoring and refuting contrary evidence and logic....

I would improve the ramming-collision detection logic such that it can tell when someone is being a nutjob and doing it on-purpose as opposed to it being an accidental scrape between two ships, and additionally I would make stations less aggressive and prone to instantly shooting ships just for being in the way or bumping into each other, instead focusing first on more warnings and fines - probably leaving accidentally boosting into other ships in a gray area, but hell, if you 'accidentally' forget which pedal is for brakes and which is for gas and injure someone, you *should* be held accountable, so meh!

 

[Spacecat]

Have you actually tried sticking to the 100 m/s speed limit every single time when docking/undocking at stations?

It's like trying to actually stick to the ridiculously low posted speed limits in parking lots that are around 10 km/h in some cases. No one does it in practice because it will take you several minutes to get out of the lot and everyone else is driving a reasonable speed that is still well over the posted limit but still completely safe for parking your car.

If FD would simply increase the station speeding limit to 200-250 m/s that would still be slow enough to reduce the impact of collisions but fast enough that players could stick to it without needlessly slowing down the entire docking/undocking process. Even the docking computer will routinely use boost to reach speeds well above 100 m/s as your ship approaches the station during auto-dock so it's clear that FD has programmed docking behavior that routinely disregards these limits to make the docking process faster and more efficient.

Especially with engineered drives. Increasing the speed limit to 150 or 200 would be an easy and reasonable fix.

 

[DukeIronHand]

On the other hand, anyone who​ fly's a Corvette without a rebuy deserves what they get.

And in Open at a CG. Yes indeed. Not the best move of the day.

 

[Argus Leadhead]

Hi there.

I may be hanging myself out to dry here...but this really bugged me tonight and is still bugging me now.

There was an incident just now at this weeks CG at Carlisle staion. I was about to dock,cash in some hard earned bounties when a player, with no shields,deliberatly crashed into me, killing himself and making me wanted, so the station would kill me as i tried to dock. This is an ongoing issue that happens regulary among players. Its been happening for a long time. I see this at almost EVERY CG. I noticed on my radar that he was coming in fast and was heading right for me.So i locked on - a clean dbx. but before i could move, bam, then the staion opens up on me. ive been caught this way twice before, costing me millions, ( i fly a corvette) 25 million. i did not have enough for a rebuy because id just been stung the night before. So.. i logged off. I know its against TOS to combat log...but this was NOT COMBAT. The reason im posting this is because when i came back to open the player said he recorded the incident and is going to report me and send in the video to try and get me banned. My handle in game is Electric Kite.

So not only was this guy content with trying to get the station to kill me for no good reason other than "lolz" (and some may call this griefing,) he then wanted to get me permanently removed from the game because his little plan didnt work out for him?

Is this the player base we are fostering now? What the hell is going on?

I swore a bunch at him, im not proud, but i was so annoyed because he was so hell bent on getting me mad and trying to ruin my game i had no other way to react but swear at him. A lot. Not my proudest moment.

I guess..i just wanted to share..video games..when they are good..they are great...but tonight? I honestly felt like i never sat down to play elite.

So well done that guy. o7 [up]

Let me get this straight.

This has happened twice?

You were flying without sufficient credits for an insurance claim?

And you killed the task to avoid a loss?

Seems to me like you need a docking computer, or at the very least notice the prompt that says "speeding" in the bottom right of your HUD. If you were going under 100m/s, you wouldn't have gained wanted status for another ship hitting you. If you were under the speed limit and gained wanted status, submit a bug report with support, they're usually pretty good about restoring credits lost to bugs.

Also, from what you describe, the offender was in no way cheating or using any exploits, just taking advantage of the fact that you haven't listened to the station announcement stating "Speed costs! Kill your speed, not your credit balance!" It sucks that this happened to you, but honestly, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I guess it takes longer for some people to learn important things than it does for others.

TL;DR
You were most likely speeding. Check your speed next time.

 

[SaliVader]

Okay, reading comprehension get....

The game as it existed, prior to the 17 Draconis exploit being fixed, had a set of rules that made that exploit allowable.

They fixed the exploit by adjusting those rules so that it's no longer allowed.

Savvy?



The Terms and Conditions of the game don't allow intentional griefing either, which suicide-winder-ramming clearly is. Yet the practical rules of the game clearly are 'allowing' it to happen, which has been your argument up til now. The same logic must apply to combat logging.

It's one way or the other, you can't claim one is an exploit and the other isn't.



Oh, great, the ideal thing is for players to all be "policing" each-other by means of suicide-ramming in front of stations. Such emergent, much gameplay, so wow. Oh and screw anybody flying anything that isn't a classy small ship. *headdesk*

Stop attempting to twist the meaning of "rules" man. I'll repeat myself one more time. It was not intended by the developers, the skimmers weren't the intended targets of the mission, but a bug made them count towards the mission, which was a bug, which was not intended by the developers, and which people exploited, ergo an exploit, because it was not intended by the developers. The same developers that said that combat logging is against the rules even if they aren't able to punish it in-game just yet, that's why they take reports for combat logging and ban people, because it's against the rules. The same developers that put the speed limit there to prevent people from ramming other people until they exploded because yes, that was a problem and that's why the speed limit was introduced. It's not a perfect solution but it's way better than what we had back then because you can just deny trolls their daily ration of salt by not flying at over 100 m/s

Good, if you think they're breaking the rules then report them for griefing.

No, you don't, I've had more than enough of your "arguing in circles" shenanigans for one day, repeating yourself doesn't change anything when you're simply ignoring and refuting contrary evidence and logic....

I would improve the ramming-collision detection logic such that it can tell when someone is being a nutjob and doing it on-purpose as opposed to it being an accidental scrape between two ships, and additionally I would make stations less aggressive and prone to instantly shooting ships just for being in the way or bumping into each other, instead focusing first on more warnings and fines - probably leaving accidentally boosting into other ships in a gray area, but hell, if you 'accidentally' forget which pedal is for brakes and which is for gas and injure someone, you *should* be held accountable, so meh!

Sorry, faulty evidence that has been proven wrong does not count.

Ah yes, of course, how could FDev not think about that! Just program the game to know which person is the griefer! Because that'd be super easy with very few variables!


I'm done going back and forth in circles with you. Good day.

 

[Surprised Brony]

It helps when the people giving options and advice aren't being condescending trolls themselves.

*Looks at your posts*

I mean, true but...you're not playing nice anymore either. An easy way to make your enemy angry is to be calm and almost emotionless in your replies. That way, you can talk about how their anger is clouding their judgement. :3

Btw, logic that can determine who wrecked into who should be easier if the game is checking vectors and whether you've requested docking or not. FD should try looking into that. It might hold a solution to this problem.

 

[Madrax573]

LoL these threads will forever be a thing in ED until it switches off or goes single player.

In this instance it is not an exploit. It is a scam exactly like the "broken" brake light scam to claim on your insurance.

Simply put there is a rule in game that directly counters these activities. They knew that you weren't following the rules and used better game mechanism knowledge to get you blasted. Simple.

Just like in life ignorance is no excuse and people with better knowledge than yourself can and will be able to scam you.

Exploit - nah mate not this time.

Griefing - only if he specifically targeting you alone specifically to cause said grief. If you were just the latest victim of his scam attempt tough luck, follow the rules and they'll just lose their DBE.

 

[Red Anders]

That's not a solution, that's a circumvention.
"Indisputable" my rear end.

Wait, did you just say that flying below the speed limit to avoid a problem that only results from flying above the speed limit was a circumvention? Obeying a speed limit is a circumvention. Oh my. I'd take your rear end off for a rest mate, it must be tired given how much talking out of it you're doing.

I am completely certain it's not at all how Fdev intended things - that, instead, as usual, we can't have any nice things because we players keep breaking everything and defying expectations, and Fdev hasn't gotten to this yet by virtue of the staggering amount of things on their plate to deal with.

They intended players to be wanted if they caused the destruction of another ship by speeding in the zone that has a speed limit. I know that's what they intended because it's what they coded. Did it occur to you that they probably knew full well it was exploitable in this way (I mean it hardly takes genius level intellects to work it out, look at the players who are doing it...) but made the wild and crazy assumption that people would do something absurd like actually fly below the damn speed limit in order to avoid that problem?

Here's the best bit. It's one of the very few areas of the game where there is an actual, working crime and punishment system and yet when I look at the thread, so many of the people who are having a moan are the ones who seem to think a C&P system is a panacea to solve all of their problems with the game. In this case, it does not matter what the other player does, as long as you don't speed you're fine. We're talking about flying at 99 m/s for maybe a minute tops and yet even something so simple is apparently so onerous to them that people flat out refuse to do it and would rather pay millions in rebuy costs and crap the forum up quacking on about it.

This is yet another one of those 'I've been punching myself in the face for five hours and now my face is really sore, what can I possibly do to prevent this problem?' threads.

I would improve the ramming-collision detection logic such that it can tell when someone is being a nutjob and doing it on-purpose as opposed to it being an accidental scrape between two ships

Dude this is fantasy island stuff. Seriously. You want an algorithm to be created and used to automatically make subjective judgements about blame in collisions and think that's actually a more reasonable way of dealing with a player getting destroyed than the player themselves taking one simple action that will prevent the entire situation from ever happening to them? Even when the action in question isn't a 'circumvention' but is merely obeying an in-game speed limit?

You're losing all sense of perspective.

 

[Cupsuki]

I get what youre saying..but unlike idiots on bikes...this problem can be fixed with maybe one line of code....

Sall im saying..

I would like to see your "One line of code" that can determine by itself whether it was an accident or not. You were breaking the speed limit, you don't want suicidewinder to be a thing? Don't speed eventually they'll get bored and look for an easier prey.

Definitely there must be a fix for this although it seems very complicated coding wise but for now you will be completely immune flying below the speed limit. It isn't that hard once you get used to it

Also don't log and if you do don't say it on the forums lol

 

[H'avok]

Wait, did you just say that flying below the speed limit to avoid a problem that only results from flying above the speed limit was a circumvention? Obeying a speed limit is a circumvention. Oh my. I'd take your rear end off for a rest mate, it must be tired given how much talking out of it you're doing.



They intended players to be wanted if they caused the destruction of another ship by speeding in the zone that has a speed limit. I know that's what they intended because it's what they coded. Did it occur to you that they probably knew full well it was exploitable in this way (I mean it hardly takes genius level intellects to work it out, look at the players who are doing it...) but made the wild and crazy assumption that people would do something absurd like actually fly below the damn speed limit in order to avoid that problem?

Here's the best bit. It's one of the very few areas of the game where there is an actual, working crime and punishment system and yet when I look at the thread, so many of the people who are having a moan are the ones who seem to think a C&P system is a panacea to solve all of their problems with the game. In this case, it does not matter what the other player does, as long as you don't speed you're fine. We're talking about flying at 99 m/s for maybe a minute tops and yet even something so simple is apparently so onerous to them that people flat out refuse to do it and would rather pay millions in rebuy costs and crap the forum up quacking on about it.

This is yet another one of those 'I've been punching myself in the face for five hours and now my face is really sore, what can I possibly do to prevent this problem?' threads.



Dude this is fantasy island stuff. Seriously. You want an algorithm to be created and used to automatically make subjective judgements about blame in collisions and think that's actually a more reasonable way of dealing with a player getting destroyed than the player themselves taking one simple action that will prevent the entire situation from ever happening to them? Even when the action in question isn't a 'circumvention' but is merely obeying an in-game speed limit?

You're losing all sense of perspective.

This thread's only voice of reason.

 

[V'larr]

Here it goes again....

Also, from what you describe, the offender was in no way cheating or using any exploits, just taking advantage of the fact that you haven't listened to the station announcement stating "Speed costs! Kill your speed, not your credit balance!" It sucks that this happened to you, but honestly, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I guess it takes longer for some people to learn important things than it does for others.
TL;DR
You were most likely speeding. Check your speed next time.

Yes, keeping speed below 100 avoids being blown up. No, it's not "okay" that people can abuse the system. And it is an exploit of the currently flawed rule system surrounding speeding, collisions, and damage to other ships around stations.

__

Stop attempting to twist the meaning of "rules" man.

You're the only one twisting and subverting meanings here, where the word "exploit" changes to fit your argument when convenient and needn't hold a consistent meaning whatsoever....

I'll repeat myself one more time. It was not intended by the developers, the skimmers weren't the intended targets of the mission, but a bug made them count towards the mission, which was a bug, which was not intended by the developers, and which people exploited, ergo an exploit, because it was not intended by the developers.

"It was not intended by the developers, players aren't the intended targets of the station, but intentional suicide ramming counts towards making the victims look like criminals, which is a bug, which is not intended by the developers, and which people are exploiting, ergo (it's) an exploit, because it was not intended by the developers."

You have a real talent for repeating yourself unecessarily....

The same developers that said that combat logging is against the rules even if they aren't able to punish it in-game just yet, that's why they take reports for combat logging and ban people, because it's against the rules.

And they do the same thing for griefers. Including people who intentionally go ramming other ships to get them blown up by the station. "Because it's against the rules."

The same developers that put the speed limit there to prevent people from ramming other people until they exploded because yes, that was a problem and that's why the speed limit was introduced. It's not a perfect solution but it's way better than what we had back then because you can just deny trolls their daily ration of salt by not flying at over 100 m/s

And rapidly became evidently clear that it wasn't even a good solution, but it *did* at least allow the work-around of slowing your ship to a crawl inside the no-fire zone, and with lots of more pressing matters to deal with, Fdev threw their hands up in the air for the time being and rightfully prioritized other things rather than waste more precious development time on a bunch of trolls.

Good, if you think they're breaking the rules then report them for griefing.

Oh for crying out loud, how can there possibly be ANY other interpretation? Are you pulling my leg or what?

Sorry, faulty evidence that has been proven wrong does not count.

Oh, spare me the irony! Please tell me you are joking! After all that nonsense regarding the $3 nameplate stuff, you REALLY think that one's going to fly with me? Come on.

Ah yes, of course, how could FDev not think about that! Just program the game to know which person is the griefer! Because that'd be super easy with very few variables!

I didn't say it would be *easy*, that wasn't the question, now was it?

I'm done going back and forth in circles with you. Good day.

Ha! Could have fooled me!

___

*Looks at your posts*
I mean, true but...you're not playing nice anymore either. An easy way to make your enemy angry is to be calm and almost emotionless in your replies. That way, you can talk about how their anger is clouding their judgement. :3
Btw, logic that can determine who wrecked into who should be easier if the game is checking vectors and whether you've requested docking or not. FD should try looking into that. It might hold a solution to this problem.

I have very low tolerance for foolishness and, well, general B.S. It's a personal flaw of mine. (And I find it just a teensy bit ironic you discuss this by adding a :3 face at the end.) Plus there's been another, separate argument earlier (in two separate threads) that's playing into my growing annoyances towards certain people in this thread.

Checking vectors and checking if docking has been requested both sound like excellent ideas to me! And not even all that difficult.

__

Wait, did you just say that flying below the speed limit to avoid a problem that only results from flying above the speed limit was a circumvention? Obeying a speed limit is a circumvention. Oh my. I'd take your rear end off for a rest mate, it must be tired given how much talking out of it you're doing.

Um, what part of flying above the speed limit predetermines that some nutjob is going to come ruin your day by playing kamikaze? I'm not familiar with the conventions of other countries, is that how it works in yours or something? Because if so, that's a pretty doggone drastic - and counteractive, I'd think - way to approach safe speed enforcement....

As for insults, well. I think you need some air freshener, because it appears the smell of your own hubris has gotten to your head.

They intended players to be wanted if they caused the destruction of another ship by speeding in the zone that has a speed limit. I know that's what they intended because it's what they coded.

lol. If "they coded it" is all it takes to be "intended", then Fdev also intended the heat meta, the Skynet AI, combat logging, all the credit exploits, and all the crashes and bugs and problems that they've been fixing with every patch.

You're talking complete nonsense, dude.

Did it occur to you that they probably knew full well it was exploitable in this way (I mean it hardly takes genius level intellects to work it out, look at the players who are doing it...) but made the wild and crazy assumption that people would do something absurd like actually fly below the damn speed limit in order to avoid that problem?

Oh, silly me, I didn't think they had a Magic Globe of All-Seeing Insightfulness that lets them anticipate everything and look into the future at will!

How completely lacking of me to think Fdev might not know it all all the time and just do the best that they can with what they've got inside a *very* limited and pressing time frame.

Here's the best bit. It's one of the very few areas of the game where there is an actual, working crime and punishment system

I just laughed out loud. But continue.

and yet when I look at the thread, so many of the people who are having a moan are the ones who seem to think a C&P system is a panacea to solve all of their problems with the game. In this case, it does not matter what the other player does, as long as you don't speed you're fine. We're talking about flying at 99 m/s for maybe a minute tops and yet even something so simple is apparently so onerous to them that people flat out refuse to do it and would rather pay millions in rebuy costs and crap the forum up quacking on about it.

Oh, yes, clearly people who complain about this are just so HAPPY about their rebuy and are bursting at the seams with joy to the point they just can't help coming here to share their stories with us. That's totally what's going on.

Oh and C&P clearly amounts to just policing via kamikaze attacks. Yup. Definitely.

This is yet another one of those 'I've been punching myself in the face for five hours and now my face is really sore, what can I possibly do to prevent this problem?' threads.

It sure is becoming that way at the rate you're going....

You want an algorithm to be created and used to automatically make subjective judgements about blame in collisions and think that's actually a more reasonable way of dealing with a player getting destroyed than the player themselves taking one simple action that will prevent the entire situation from ever happening to them?

Yes.

I apparently live in the future where I can point right now to other games that do this very same thing on a regular basis. If I felt more affable towards you I'd look up stock prices for you, but I must confess, I'm not feeling terribly keen on that idea.

Even when the action in question isn't a 'circumvention' but is merely obeying an in-game speed limit?

You're getting confused (not surprising, given the lack of any coherent reasoning thus far). You claimed that staying under the speed limit is supposed to be a *solution* to kamikaze griefing. And it's not, it's a circumvention, a flawed one at that, that fails to address and prevent the problem from occuring. That is, *not a solution*.

You're losing all sense of perspective.

Oh, good GRIEF.

I sincerely hope at this point both of you are working in tandem just to play a trick on me, because this is moving past the point of "Ponderous, man, PONDEROUS!" to utter disbelief on my part.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

A reminder to all to discuss the topic, not each other.

 

[lokvette]

Just like to thank the OP, who I belive left the thread bk on page 3, why I never do GG in open.

Even with all the stick to the speed limet posts theres still no excuse to the play stlye of a brown starfish kind of player who thinks this is fun.

 

[Pyrotiger]

Ignoring the ranting and raving.

If you are going to do a CG in Open you must be prepared to accept what comes with it. It's not ideal - that's the pragmatic view.

If you don't like the rebuy screen, fly.below 100 and switch into Solo when necessary. If that is something which affects your game experience or you see it as an exploit, go earn more cash so you can replace your Corvette. Because it's a target. That's the reality, and pilots should deal in reality first and foremost.

You cannot change other's behaviour. You can change your own. We don't live in an ideal world, and ED is not always an ideal universe!

 

[H'avok]

Here it goes again....



Yes, keeping speed below 100 avoids being blown up. No, it's not "okay" that people can abuse the system. And it is an exploit of the currently flawed rule system surrounding speeding, collisions, and damage to other ships around stations.

__



You're the only one twisting and subverting meanings here, where the word "exploit" changes to fit your argument when convenient and needn't hold a consistent meaning whatsoever....



"It was not intended by the developers, players aren't the intended targets of the station, but intentional suicide ramming counts towards making the victims look like criminals, which is a bug, which is not intended by the developers, and which people are exploiting, ergo (it's) an exploit, because it was not intended by the developers."

You have a real talent for repeating yourself unecessarily....



And they do the same thing for griefers. Including people who intentionally go ramming other ships to get them blown up by the station. "Because it's against the rules."



And rapidly became evidently clear that it wasn't even a good solution, but it *did* at least allow the work-around of slowing your ship to a crawl inside the no-fire zone, and with lots of more pressing matters to deal with, Fdev threw their hands up in the air for the time being and rightfully prioritized other things rather than waste more precious development time on a bunch of trolls.



Oh for crying out loud, how can there possibly be ANY other interpretation? Are you pulling my leg or what?



Oh, spare me the irony! Please tell me you are joking! After all that nonsense regarding the $3 nameplate stuff, you REALLY think that one's going to fly with me? Come on.



I didn't say it would be *easy*, that wasn't the question, now was it?



Ha! Could have fooled me!

___




I have very low tolerance for foolishness and, well, general B.S. It's a personal flaw of mine. (And I find it just a teensy bit ironic you discuss this by adding a :3 face at the end.) Plus there's been another, separate argument earlier (in two separate threads) that's playing into my growing annoyances towards certain people in this thread.

Checking vectors and checking if docking has been requested both sound like excellent ideas to me! And not even all that difficult.

__




Um, what part of flying above the speed limit predetermines that some nutjob is going to come ruin your day by playing kamikaze? I'm not familiar with the conventions of other countries, is that how it works in yours or something? Because if so, that's a pretty doggone drastic - and counteractive, I'd think - way to approach safe speed enforcement....

As for insults, well. I think you need some air freshener, because it appears the smell of your own hubris has gotten to your head.



lol. If "they coded it" is all it takes to be "intended", then Fdev also intended the heat meta, the Skynet AI, combat logging, all the credit exploits, and all the crashes and bugs and problems that they've been fixing with every patch.

You're talking complete nonsense, dude.



Oh, silly me, I didn't think they had a Magic Globe of All-Seeing Insightfulness that lets them anticipate everything and look into the future at will!

How completely lacking of me to think Fdev might not know it all all the time and just do the best that they can with what they've got inside a *very* limited and pressing time frame.



I just laughed out loud. But continue.



Oh, yes, clearly people who complain about this are just so HAPPY about their rebuy and are bursting at the seams with joy to the point they just can't help coming here to share their stories with us. That's totally what's going on.

Oh and C&P clearly amounts to just policing via kamikaze attacks. Yup. Definitely.



It sure is becoming that way at the rate you're going....



Yes.

I apparently live in the future where I can point right now to other games that do this very same thing on a regular basis. If I felt more affable towards you I'd look up stock prices for you, but I must confess, I'm not feeling terribly keen on that idea.



You're getting confused (not surprising, given the lack of any coherent reasoning thus far). You claimed that staying under the speed limit is supposed to be a *solution* to kamikaze griefing. And it's not, it's a circumvention, a flawed one at that, that fails to address and prevent the problem from occuring. That is, *not a solution*.



Oh, good GRIEF.

I sincerely hope at this point both of you are working in tandem just to play a trick on me, because this is moving past the point of "Ponderous, man, PONDEROUS!" to utter disbelief on my part.

Lol, you're delusional. Come back to the real world please.

 

[bitstorm]

Yes, keeping speed below 100 avoids being blown up. No, it's not "okay" that people can abuse the system. And it is an exploit of the currently flawed rule system surrounding speeding, collisions, and damage to other ships around stations.

While I agree it can be classed as an "exploit" depending on how you want to define that term.

The issue of determining intent is a really difficult problem to solve.

Which is why car insurance fraud and courts are a thing.

You can implement rules similar to how car insurance work in real life, for example if you're impacted from behind then THEY pay the insurance. But in the end assumptions have to be made and in the real world that just gets exploited by enterprising individuals.

[video=youtube;HFoes7rsZBA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFoes7rsZBA[/video]

In the end the speed limit isn't ideal, but keeping below it works (mostly).

Though I gotta say I do find the need to implement all the speed limit stuff around stations a bit of a shame.

I honestly used to love boosting out of stations in my T9 ramming NPCs on the way, sounds stupid but it's just a game and there was a genuine joy to it! You'd be like "YEEESSS!!!" if you got an impact and heard an explosion shortly after.

Obviously players are a different matter.

[video=youtube;uIBPtuwpQQ4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIBPtuwpQQ4[/video]

He got a double!

Sure it was unrealistic, but it was one of the great things about undocking in a T9, a huge ship that can't turn for * but you better get outta the way because your life depends on it. Eagles bouncing off your hull!

It's a game, shame that had to go but there you are.